Matthew Lloyd (2001) vs. Lance Franklin (2008)

[james_omahoney]

[/b]I'd say his efficiency overall (58%) is skewed by his goal accuracy (50%) from his disposal accuracy (72%)

I guess i won't have to suck it up now

Thanks for doing the math for me though

No worries. Obviously you couldn't do it. What I was saying was that if you're going to propose stuff like that then you need to show something for it. And you couldn't - so I did it for you.

If I was trying to make Franklin look bad then why would I do it for you when it shows an improved efficiency rate? And it's funny that you're still beaten, no matter how you look at it, and you're still trying to distract attention from the facts. Good one .

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

Yeah he did kick behinds, and I'm pretty sure I followed that post with another that gave that figure of 7.2, if you had bothered to read through properly. You didn't correct me at all.

At the end of the day, you can misquote me all you like. You can try to divert attention. You can even get more non-biased people reading through the thread and thinking you're a complete moron - but Lloyd had a better season, and the facts are irrefutable.

You followed that post mentioning that franklin averaged 7.28 disposals in general play. I didn't find anything about lloyd's 7.2

At least we're counting franklin's disposals now. Remember when you wanted to cut his inside50s in half cos franklin wastes most of his disposals?


Most non-biased people reading back voted for Franklin. Even one of your own.

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

No worries. Obviously you couldn't do it. What I was saying was that if you're going to propose stuff like that then you need to show something for it. And you couldn't - so I did it for you.

If I was trying to make Franklin look bad then why would I do it for you when it shows an improved efficiency rate? And it's funny that you're still beaten, no matter how you look at it, and you're still trying to distract attention from the facts. Good one .

You did the math which refuted your original theories. Well done. And now we can agree that his general disposal is actually very good. And we're going to count all his disposals right? 72% is a nice upgrade from what you originally thought.

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

7.28 . . . that's more than 7.2 isn't it?

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

7.28 is more than 7.2 . . . this number would've been higher if he didn't have two games with injury towards the end where he barely touched the ball.

 

[james_omahoney]

7.28 is more than 7.2 . . . this number would've been higher if he didn't have two games with injury towards the end where he barely touched the ball.

Actually I did in fact say Lloyd had 7.5 GP possessions. I also said Franklin's 7.28 were "General play possessions + shots on goal that missed completely". This is not the same as exclusive GP possessions. I said 6.3 were his exclusive GP possessions. 7.5 > 6.3.

You did the math which refuted your original theories. Well done. And now we can agree that his general disposal is actually very good. And we're going to count all his disposals right? 72% is a nice upgrade from what you originally thought.

1. My math actually proved my theory that about 4.5 'general play' possies were effective. It also proved the theory that only 1-2 inside 50s were effective per game. I said his 'general play' efficiency couldn't be much higher than 70%. My math proved that too. The rest is just 10ths of a possession, and makes no differences to the areas where Lloyd has Franklin pinged. I challenged you to do the math to back up your argument. You couldn't. So I did it.

2. Thanks;

3. See point 1.


Anyway, I am SO over this whole thing. Obviously everyone has their own opinion and can't be swayed either way. I'll go by what I feel are the relevant facts and evidence (which back up my perception of who had a better season). I feel we're really just going round in circles now. Unless there's something else to be discussed in the debate I really don't care to repeat myself over and over. You go by your intepretation of the relevant stats and your perception of who had a better season. You are entitled to that.

 

[aussieicon91]

Do you actually READ threads? Or do you just stare at the screen and slobber as you mash the keyboard with your oversized palm....

The REASON Roughead kicked 70+ goals is due to the fact that Hawthorn DID NOT have the quality of shared support that Essendon had in 2001. Yet another cold, hard undeniably black and white statistical fact that you and your like can't seem to grasp - Even when it is posted a dozen times in the very thread you are responding to.

Look at the poll result peon, you lose.

Look at yourself, buddy?

It's laughable because you talk about others ignoring what you are saying when you do the EXACT same thing.

How you can say that a larger range of goalkickers is anywhere near the equal or close the capability of playing along side another strong key forward is beyhond me.

Have you seen any of the State of Origin games? You know, when all of the best forwards are stacked on the same team? You'll hardly ever see one forward constantly dominate and kick 6-7 goals per game on a regular basis.

By your logic, if it was easier with a number of other stronger forwards along side you then dominant teams would have 2 players in the same team kicking over 100 goals in a season.

Just face it, Franklin's accomplished season this year overshadows Llyod's in 2001 because it was done under more difficulty whilst competing with a far more superior forward line and Franklin was far more superior over his opponents then what Llyod was, hence why Franklin had so many more shots on goal then Llyod did.

The whole 'spread your goal kickers around' is a load of rubbish and a relatively poor arguement. All it does it prove furthermore that Llyod was an even bigger focus then Franklin was at Hawthorn because if this was actually true then Llyod wouldn't of kicked as many goals as he did.

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

Actually I did in fact say Lloyd had 7.5 GP possessions. I also said Franklin's 7.28 were "General play possessions + shots on goal that missed completely". This is not the same as exclusive GP possessions. I said 6.3 were his exclusive GP possessions. 7.5 > 6.3.




1. My math actually proved my theory that about 4.5 'general play' possies were effective. It also proved the theory that only 1-2 inside 50s were effective per game. I said his 'general play' efficiency couldn't be much higher than 70%. My math proved that too. The rest is just 10ths of a possession, and makes no differences to the areas where Lloyd has Franklin pinged. I challenged you to do the math to back up your argument. You couldn't. So I did it.

2. Thanks;

3. See point 1.


Anyway, I am SO over this whole thing. Obviously everyone has their own opinion and can't be swayed either way. I'll go by what I feel are the relevant facts and evidence (which back up my perception of who had a better season). I feel we're really just going round in circles now. Unless there's something else to be discussed in the debate I really don't care to repeat myself over and over. You go by your intepretation of the relevant stats and your perception of who had a better season. You are entitled to that.

Where did you get 7.5 possessions from? I got 7.2 possessions by subtracting scoring shots from total possessions . . .

I wonder about your math sometimes. Earlier in the thread you said Lloyd had 9 general possessions a game . . . you're all over the shop.

Yeah you did say he got about 4.5 effective disposals a game, yet you still managed to surmise that anything over 70% would be a flattering figure. You've made so many different calculations on the same stat, some of them were right, some of them were wrong, finally you managed to clarify it. And 72% is a good stat for disposal effectiveness, we agree.

I also see you haven't acknowledged that kicking to a contest is actually worth a possession.

Also failed to acknowledge that more non-biased supporters chose Franklin, even though you alleged otherwise.

What was Matthew Lloyd's general disposal effectiveness percentage anyway?

 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Also failed to acknowledge that more non-biased supporters chose Franklin, even though you alleged otherwise.

How are you working this out Einstein? I just quickly browsed through the thread and counted 17 neutrals post who they thought had the better season, 11 said Lloyd.

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

How are you working this out Einstein? I just quickly browsed through the thread and counted 17 neutrals post who they thought had the better season, 11 said Lloyd.

What about Essendon supporters who said Franklin? Did you count those?

 

[Jade]

Look at yourself, buddy?

It's laughable because you talk about others ignoring what you are saying when you do the EXACT same thing.

How you can say that a larger range of goalkickers is anywhere near the equal or close the capability of playing along side another strong key forward is beyhond me.

I said it, and i'll say it again S-L-O-W-L-Y. If a defense is forced to concentrate on two large threats versus one, they will have a more difficult time containing them versus concentrating on one alone. Hence, Franklin was benefitted by having Roughead beside him.

Have you seen any of the State of Origin games? You know, when all of the best forwards are stacked on the same team? You'll hardly ever see one forward constantly dominate and kick 6-7 goals per game on a regular basis.

By your logic, if it was easier with a number of other stronger forwards along side you then dominant teams would have 2 players in the same team kicking over 100 goals in a season.

And due to the limit on how many goals an entire team could kick, they would become too reliant on said forwards, as Hawthorn are, and would be in trouble if no one else could pick up the slack should either of them get injured / have a bad run of form.

And by the way, they don't HAVE regular state of origin games, in case you didn't notice.

Just face it, Franklin's accomplished season this year overshadows Llyod's in 2001 because it was done under more difficulty whilst competing with a far more superior forward line and Franklin was far more superior over his opponents then what Llyod was, hence why Franklin had so many more shots on goal then Llyod did.

Far more superior forward line? Essendon in 2001 kicked more goals then Hawthorn of 2008. Which forward line was superior? And for christ sake it's Lloyd, not Llyod.

The whole 'spread your goal kickers around' is a load of rubbish and a relatively poor arguement. All it does it prove furthermore that Llyod was an even bigger focus then Franklin was at Hawthorn because if this was actually true then Llyod wouldn't of kicked as many goals as he did.

Game - Set - Match. Geez its sweet as when they are just handed to you like this:

1) Lloyd kicked a LOWER percentage of Essendons HIGHER tally of goals. In other words, the goals were spread around more evenly. They weren't as reliant on Lloyd as a team as Hawthorn were on Franklin.

-and yet-

2) Being the ONLY major spearhead he was subject to GREATER scrutiny by defense. So he kicks a higher average then Franklin, under greater defensive pressure!

So lets just recap that last one, just for laughs. You were flat out, mathematically, undeniably WRONG when stating that Lloyd was a greater focus then Franklin. And he still had him beat!

 

[whatimtalkingbout]

1) Lloyd kicked a LOWER percentage of Essendons HIGHER tally of goals. In other words, the goals were spread around more evenly. They weren't as reliant on Lloyd as a team as Hawthorn were on Franklin.

Across the whole team, i'll take your word for it. Across the forward line . . .um, no. I think Scott Lucas was 2nd with 35 goals back then.

2) Being the ONLY major spearhead he was subject to GREATER scrutiny by defense. So he kicks a higher average then Franklin, under greater defensive pressure!

Does that mean Fevola's only a 3 goal a year lesser forward than Lance Franklin? Cos that was the difference after the home and away season. No, it's shown that when you have a few prolific forwards, it's harder for the main spearhead to kick a ton. And Lloyd plaid pretty much a lone hand in that forward line.

Also, he was a full forward in the days before flooding or double teaming forwards. Franklin's not even a full forward, but when he is, he is double/triple teamed.

People think the hands in the back has helped the forwards, but i can tell you that franklin has given away more hands in the back than he has received. I actually can't think of a single hands in the back free that he has received.

 

[aussieicon91]

I said it, and i'll say it again S-L-O-W-L-Y. If a defense is forced to concentrate on two large threats versus one, they will have a more difficult time containing them versus concentrating on one alone. Hence, Franklin was benefitted by having Roughead beside him.

Then why do you regulary see the next leading goal-kicker of a team that features a goal-kicker who kicks over a 100 goals in a season; kick only 20-30 goals in a season? It is extremely rare that you see a player kick over 100 goals in a season whilst another one in the same team contributes 70 so basically, you're theory is destroyed by this evidence. It's funny aswell because even Mark Williams kicked more goals then Lucas in 2001.

This is what I am talking about, you are clearly deluded in the head and can't comprehend what I'm saying and you fail to type a proper response because I'm right and you're wrong.

What you can't comprehend is that if there are two gun forwards, it is going to be extra harder for one especially to kick a 100 goals in a season. It's takes one forward to be stabstancially better then the other forward to able to kick a 100 goals in a season. The fact that Franklin was still able to kick a 100 goals in a season, along side a player who has shown he is capable of being in the top 5 for the coleman is what makes Franklin's acchievements this year more special then what Lloyd's was because Lucas in 2001 was nowhere near the standard of Roughead, infact even Williams kicked more goals which proves that Lloyd was the lone ranger.

Far more superior forward line? Essendon in 2001 kicked more goals then Hawthorn of 2008. Which forward line was superior? And for christ sake it's Lloyd, not Llyod.

You are joking. So you think...

130 goals > 180 goals

???

Game - Set - Match. Geez its sweet as when they are just handed to you like this:

1) Lloyd kicked a LOWER percentage of Essendons HIGHER tally of goals. In other words, the goals were spread around more evenly. They weren't as reliant on Lloyd as a team as Hawthorn were on Franklin.

-and yet-

2) Being the ONLY major spearhead he was subject to GREATER scrutiny by defense. So he kicks a higher average then Franklin, under greater defensive pressure!

So lets just recap that last one, just for laughs. You were flat out, mathematically, undeniably WRONG when stating that Lloyd was a greater focus then Franklin. And he still had him beat!

Mate, you've lost. More neutral fans have voted for Franklin.

Do you know what a target is? As a midfielder or a defender, you can't possibly be a forward line target and if they divide goals throughout the team then obviously Lloyd was the lone ranger.

The fact that Lloyd was so dominant and so far ahead of Lucas furthermore proves that he was the lone ranger. Who exactly do you think the Essendon midfielders were looking for as soon as they get a centre clearance? They most certainly aren't going to look to pass it off to a defender so they can kick a goal, they're gonna be looking for Lloyd.

 

[Deledio_Judd]

Lloyd easily

 

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

Mate, you've lost. More neutral fans have voted for Franklin.

Again, how are you working this out? Did you go through every single person that voted and note their club? 18 neutrals have posted, 12 voted Lloyd.

I think it’s amazing Lloyd is leading actually. Even though Lloyd had the better season I thought the general dislike of Lloyd / Essendon on here (plus the love for Franklin) would mean he'd struggle to get votes. Just goes to show that on this site the common opinion is that Lloyd had the better season fairly comfortably

 

[OzBomber]

hehe

You're putting on quite the show....

Essenscum fans vainly clinging on to their our hasbeen, couldavbeen, wouldavbeen skipper who doesnt even compete with buddys shadow.

He must be the best couldavbeen and wouldavbeen ever for someone who's nearly kicked 900 goals.

 

[OzBomber]

Look at yourself, buddy?

It's laughable because you talk about others ignoring what you are saying when you do the EXACT same thing.

How you can say that a larger range of goalkickers is anywhere near the equal or close the capability of playing along side another strong key forward is beyhond me.

Have you seen any of the State of Origin games? You know, when all of the best forwards are stacked on the same team? You'll hardly ever see one forward constantly dominate and kick 6-7 goals per game on a regular basis.

By your logic, if it was easier with a number of other stronger forwards along side you then dominant teams would have 2 players in the same team kicking over 100 goals in a season.

Just face it, Franklin's accomplished season this year overshadows Llyod's in 2001 because it was done under more difficulty whilst competing with a far more superior forward line and Franklin was far more superior over his opponents then what Llyod was, hence why Franklin had so many more shots on goal then Llyod did.

The whole 'spread your goal kickers around' is a load of rubbish and a relatively poor arguement. All it does it prove furthermore that Llyod was an even bigger focus then Franklin was at Hawthorn because if this was actually true then Llyod wouldn't of kicked as many goals as he did.

Nah, because having 2 quality forwards takes away the 2nd best defender from coming across and spoiling the best forward.

When Lloyd had his run in 99-2001 he was double teamed and triple teamed numerous times and was still able to kick bags of goals.

PS. Ben, learn how to spell Matthew Lloyd correctly before you bag him.

 

[Smyth94]

You are joking. So you think...

130 goals > 180 goals

You cannot be serious?

A forward line is made up by more than two players champ

 

[Jade]

Across the whole team, i'll take your word for it. Across the forward line . . .um, no. I think Scott Lucas was 2nd with 35 goals back then.

Apologies, I didn't make that clear, Lloyd kicked a LOWER percentage of Essendons goals in 2001 then Franklin kicked of Hawthors in 2008 - ie. demonstrating the greater spread.

Does that mean Fevola's only a 3 goal a year lesser forward than Lance Franklin? Cos that was the difference after the home and away season. No, it's shown that when you have a few prolific forwards, it's harder for the main spearhead to kick a ton. And Lloyd plaid pretty much a lone hand in that forward line.

Absolutely! Matter of fact, I rank Fevola HIGHER then Franklin for the second half of '08, he was coming HARD. (Note, before I get angry unwarranted responses, I rate Franklin higher then Fevola for '08)

Also, he was a full forward in the days before flooding or double teaming forwards. Franklin's not even a full forward, but when he is, he is double/triple teamed.

Incorrect. Flooding as we know it today was coined in 2000, and in full effect in 2001.

People think the hands in the back has helped the forwards, but i can tell you that franklin has given away more hands in the back than he has received. I actually can't think of a single hands in the back free that he has received.

Which actually supports the Lloyd is greater then Franklin theme. Lloyd was in 2001 a phenomenenal leading forward. If that rule had existed then he would have had an even higher tally.

 

[Roberiquez]

He must be the best couldavbeen and wouldavbeen ever for someone who's nearly kicked 900 goals.

well at least you agreed wholeheartedly with the hasbeen tag

 

[Jade]

Then why do you regulary see the next leading goal-kicker of a team that features a goal-kicker who kicks over a 100 goals in a season; kick only 20-30 goals in a season? It is extremely rare that you see a player kick over 100 goals in a season whilst another one in the same team contributes 70 so basically, you're theory is destroyed by this evidence. It's funny aswell because even Mark Williams kicked more goals then Lucas in 2001.

Theory destroyed by evidence? How many time do you have to be corrected? And the funny thing is, you aren't getting corrected on different things. This guy, I'm fairly convinced actually has some sort of faculty difficulties. You keep going back to the same cr*p and getting hammered for it. How many times do you have to be told? Essendon ACTUALLY kicked more goals then Hawthorn, they did it with a better spread. Roughead kicking 70 and Williams 30 only shows that Lloyd was under greater pressure then Franklin and Roughead.

This is what I am talking about, you are clearly deluded in the head and can't comprehend what I'm saying and you fail to type a proper response because I'm right and you're wrong.

LOL.... poll result seems to be showing who's right and wrong, loser.

What you can't comprehend is that if there are two gun forwards, it is going to be extra harder for one especially to kick a 100 goals in a season. It's takes one forward to be stabstancially better then the other forward to able to kick a 100 goals in a season. The fact that Franklin was still able to kick a 100 goals in a season, along side a player who has shown he is capable of being in the top 5 for the coleman is what makes Franklin's acchievements this year more special then what Lloyd's was because Lucas in 2001 was nowhere near the standard of Roughead, infact even Williams kicked more goals which proves that Lloyd was the lone ranger.


You are joking. So you think...

130 goals > 180 goals

???.

See above. And I mean scroll up, don't look at the ceiling.

Mate, you've lost. More neutral fans have voted for Franklin.

Pretty sure someone else posted that 18 or so neutrals declared a vote, of which like 12 were for Lloyd. This must be stinging something bad.

Do you know what a target is? As a midfielder or a defender, you can't possibly be a forward line target and if they divide goals throughout the team then obviously Lloyd was the lone ranger.

LOL!! Lloyd, who kicked a lower percentage of Essendons goals then Franklin did for Hawthorn? Mate you are copping an absolute flogging!

The fact that Lloyd was so dominant and so far ahead of Lucas furthermore proves that he was the lone ranger. Who exactly do you think the Essendon midfielders were looking for as soon as they get a centre clearance? They most certainly aren't going to look to pass it off to a defender so they can kick a goal, they're gonna be looking for Lloyd.

See the above comment dipsh*t. You have been absolutely smacked. And the poll reflects excatly that. Why don't you go cry about it and whinge how unfair it is that Lloyd in 01 was better.....

 

[Roberiquez]

See the above comment dipsh*t. You have been absolutely smacked. And the poll reflects excatly that. Why don't you go cry about it and whinge how unfair it is that Lloyd in 01 was better.....

55% is a smashing victory?

 

[rainman06]

55% is a smashing victory?

It is when half of buddys votes are from flog tassie supporters like you starting up new accounts just to vote again

 

[Roberiquez]

It is when half of buddys votes are from flog tassie supporters like you starting up new accounts just to vote again

before you post again, just put down the pipe and realise that your paranoia is a side affect of the low grade crack you're smokin'

 

[OzBomber]

well at least you agreed wholeheartedly with the hasbeen tag

Not quite. He's not kicking 100 goals a year, but he's still consistently kicking 60+ goals every year. I don't believe he is a hasbeen.